March 29, 2009
Stop The Presses!
Newspapers As We Know Them May Cease To Exist ... But What Will Become Of The News Itself?
-
Pressman Jim Herron looks over a final edition of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer as it comes off the press Monday, March 16, 2009, at the printing plant of The Seattle Times in Bothell, Wash., where the paper has been published. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)
-
Play CBS Video Video Stopping The Presses For Good Newspapers seem to be in peril. Recently, many big city newspapers have stopped their presses. This is the headline the newspaper industry wants buried. Jeff Greenfield reports.
When it comes to news about the news, no news is good news.
The Rocky Mountain News recently wrapped up operations. The Tribune Company filed for bankruptcy protection. The New York Times and Washington Post have announced layoffs.
And the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which has been in production for more than 140 years, continues to produce news stories, but beginning this month it's doing so only online with a reduced staff. The Ann Arbor News will follow suit in July.
Are we really facing the demise of the great metropolitan daily?
It was the newspaper that became as powerful a force as any it covered, the kind of power Charles Foster Kane delighted in wielding in "Citizen Kane." It was the newspaper that brought news of crime and corruption to its readers, with an energy - and occasional manic recklessness - captured in the classic "His Girl Friday."
And it was the newspaper whose proudest moments came when it held the powerful to account - even bringing down "All The President's Men."
Hard as it for those of us whose day cannot begin without the newspaper, it is a medium that cannot survive without dramatic change. Indeed, it's not clear if it can survive as we know it at all.
But does that mean an enormous vacuum, an absence of the kind of information a democratic society needs? Or are there new sources emerging to do that work?
Longtime media watcher Michael Wolff said, "It's the end of the newspaper business right now at this point in time."
Why is Wolff predicting the imminent end of the newspaper?
Consider the facts: Just since 2000, daily newspaper circulation has dropped from 55 million to 50 million in the last two years print ad revenue for papers dropped 28%, more than $11 billion - and that was before the recession really kicked in.
Classified ads, the most profitable of all, have migrated to the Web on sites like Craigslist.com.
(AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
And while many newspapers have a home online, readers don't pay a dime to read it.
As for paying for newsprint? Just ask the next generation, like these Columbia School of Journalism students:
"The Internet is something that we constantly have with us," said one woman. "I constantly have my laptop on."
"I read the New York Times and Washington Post online for my national news," said one man.
"Realistically, I prefer the Internet, I do, because things are updated constantly," said another woman.
For newspaper veterans like former Des Moines Register editor Geneva Overholser, now dean of the USC School of Journalism, the potential loss of the newspaper is a clear and present danger to our civic life.
"Newsrooms in newspapers have been the predominant source of original reporting about what's going on in city hall, in classrooms, about Washington, about the international scene," Overholser said. "There'll be a time when we do really need to stand up and say, 'Wait a minute!' and it's getting pretty close."
By contrast, Wolff is highly optimistic about the future, Just look around, he says:
"It is potentially an incredibly good time," Wolff said. "We have a much bigger audience than we've ever had before. We can do it faster, we can do it better, we can even do it prettier than before."
Wolff is putting his energies behind his ideas - he founded the Web site newser.com. But the site itself illustrates the uncertain nature of the future. Just about everything it offers is not his but content aggregated, as they say, from existing newspapers ¬the Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, the Daily Telegraph, the Washington Post.
If these newspapers went away, what would he aggregate?
"Were they to go away, however, I guarantee that I can deliver the same information and at the same quality from a broad range of other sources," Wolff said.
There's evidence that some of those new sources are already here. Talkingpointsmemo.com is a blog with a liberal perspective. It broke the story last year about U.S. attorneys allegedly fired for political reasons. Instapundit.com, with a conservative-libertarian tilt, is another blog providing analysis and opinion.
And what about the "local angle"? (Editors always tell their reporters to "get the local angle.) Well, you can't get more local than the suburban community of Montclair, New Jersey, where Debra Galant and Liz George have launched a Web site, Baristanet.com.
"We are much more different because we are more dynamic," George said. "People are coming to have a conversation, and you cannot do it with a newspaper."
The site is produced from their living rooms and coffee shops, with news from (and opinions about) the comings and goings of their community, where, they say, the Web offers powerful advantages over the printed page quite apart from the cost advantages of no paper, no presses, no delivery costs.
"We are there the minute you hear the question," Galant said. "The moment the helicopter is overhead and you wonder if a police search is going on. You are not going to have to wait for the paper on Thursday you will go to Baristanet to see what is happening down the street."
Nancy Mehegan is one of their satisfied readers.
"Every day I go on it," she said. "The newspaper is kind of dry, you have a few letters to the editor, but here you have certain personalities, like the more local of us. I only read the paper for local garage sales now. There is something more vital about the online."
For Mark Porter, editor of the Montclair Times, baristanet.com represents something ... different.
"They are really like a lamprey eel feeding off the work of another entity," Porter said. "They have not gone to meetings; they have no gone to five or six sources that a newspaper reporter has done for the story. It really is pilferage."
So ... can the immediacy of the Web and the depth of the traditional newspaper somehow be fused?
In Philadelphia, entrepreneur Brian Tierney and a consortium of wealthy investors bought the 180-year-old Philadelphia Inquirer and the tabloid Daily News nearly three years ago. They've placed a multi-hundred million dollar bet that the papers can adapt and survive, even in print.
"We had a series recently on the EPA and the Bush administration; it took several months to do it, it cost a quarter of a million dollars to do that. I can't do that with two bloggers," Tierney said. "I can't do that the way all-news radio in this market does it, where they basically buy our paper and then paraphrase our stories every day. We are the originators of the investigative work that needs to be done."
But Tierney is facing the same dilemma every paper is: while he could save a fortune becoming Web-only, readers don't pay for it and advertisers won't pay nearly what they do for a print ad.
One answer, he says is that readers will have to start paying - either with a subscription or a so-called "micropayment," a few cents for each article they click on the web.
"Something," Tierney suggest, "not that much money, given the overall scope of what television bills and cell phone bills and cable bills are. And I think people will pay it, and so if you have unique content, I think you can get a premium for it. And that's what we have to do this year."
At the heart of Tierney's efforts to save the enterprise is the Web site Philly.com, where content from the Inquirer and the Daily News is combined with original fare.
But sit in at a meeting of the editorial staff, and you can watch what the revolution has wrought.
It sounds like the kind of editorial meeting any newspaper has. But there are big differences.
The Web site folds in text, video, and music. It updates constantly, changing its look and content by the hour - more opinion right after lunch, when users might need a jolt of caffeine.
Fusing print, video and the Web is drastically changing what reporters do - and must do.
"What that means to me is not only do you have to know how to report and write, you have to be a wire service reporter, and blog, and you have to know how to use a video camera, you have to know how to appear before a TV camera, be on the radio," said Inquirer editor Bill Marimow. "You really have to be a maestro of the media."
And that, says 30-year Inquirer veteran Gail Shister, comes with a cost, but one that has to be paid.
"I think the big downside of speed is that a lot of times, you don't get the quality control," Shister said. "You don't get enough editing. And you don't get the extra phone call to check something."
And while Shister mourns the potential loss of the printed page, she's a realist:
"I think there's no question that we're losing something, but it's generational," she said. "People under 50 never got into the ritual to start with. They don't know what they're missing because they've never had it. And more importantly, they don't care. I still get excited when I pick up a new paper and open it for the first time.
"But I'm a dinosaur. And I accept that!"
Right now, Brian Tierney's company is in bankruptcy. He argues that if the people who read the Inquirer pay for it, with a higher newsstand price, and a subscriber fee on the Web, the enterprise will survive in print and online.
"Times change," Tierney said. "But you can either look in the rearview mirror and lament the past or you can say, you know, 'It's damn exciting!'"
But, what if the Inquirer - what if newspapers in general - don't survive?
Optimists are confident that new forces arise, that the next generation of reporters will be telling their editors to "Tear out the font page!" even if there aren't "pages" to tear out.
The more wary voices, like Geneva Overholser, say maybe.
"This democracy might survive with a different-looking press," she said. "But I don't think we've figured out a complete menu that would replace newspapers."
For more info:
© MMIX, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 42 Comments
- some good investigative work is done by the tv news media. I don't feel my local newspaper has been really good, there is one reporter who reports horrible child abuse problems going on, but offers no solutions and then moves on. It seems so lacking when compared to the TV news troubleshooters investigators who report about bad things but also things they try to do to help the situation or they go around asking high politicians what could be done, sometimes the FBI even gets involved. It seems the TV news does better journalism work than the newspaper has been doing, also better at informing the community of how to get help. at least that's what it has seemed like the past 5 years or so. the newspaper does seem to be hurting from the supply-demand economics and the newspaper is getting skinnier and skinnier.
- Reply to this comment
- The reasons I no longer either buy or look at newspaper is the following.
1. They are run by publishers who are rich and who only speak from the p-o-v of top-down regulation and capital competition.
2. They have no philosophical breadth, but are dominated by ads, ads and more ads.
3. They have the tendency to create endless dialectics over issues for which we do not have adequate data to make decisions.
4. They swallow whatever the Coven-ment tells them is data, whether it is true or not.
5. They do not pursue moral leads into situations of deceit and corruption. They waffle on moral issues because they believe there is no such thing as truth -- to the man.
6. They consider themselves to be above the rest of us; so they purvey people to solve our human problems for us but they don't acknowledge those of us who solve our own problems.
7. They stay in their corner and they refuse to listen to new information. I have called newspapers about my research a half a dozen times; and they won't touch NASA dysinfo with a ten-foot pole.
8. They deserve to die; they've bought Oblivion and they're going to pay for it.
9. Thanks to Communication Curricula as at George Mason University, where the topic of Telling the Truth never surfaces; nor does Deceit; nor does Propaganda.
Thank you for this opportunity to speak my peace/piece. I feel better. - Reply to this comment
- Dear CBS Sunday Morning,
Here's my thoughts about the newspaper situation:
What will happen to the COMICS!
So far, the newspaper websites I've seen don't have a "comics" section to click on. So, where will they go...cybercomix , etherfunnies or maybe dot comics?
I think online newspapers should at least think about providing a "Sunday" comics section!
So what will become of the nation's beloved comics section?
Charles Schultz would probably like to know....
Dave Louis
Kilauea, Hawaii - Reply to this comment
- My husband and I start each morning with a good cup of coffee and a newspaper....can't imagine beginning the day (or ending it!) without one. I also read several newspapers daily on-line, but it is not the same as browsing through the hand held paper,trading sections with your spouse, sharing comments, and giving suggestions about what to read. As a child I could hardly wait for my father to come home from work each day with The Daily News and New York Post tucked under his arms! Our 5 children have always known to "give Mom 15 minutes of peace while she reads the paper!" Maybe it is old -fashioned, but holding a newspaper is a pleasure and ritual I hope to never have to give up!
- Reply to this comment
- The newspaper people interviewed for this story clearly have a very fragile connection with reality. The credibility of mainstream newspapers has been in serious question for a long time. All during the Clinton administration, the papers reported right-wing misinformation about the administration without questioning hardly any of it; then during the Bush admnistration they reported the misinformation provided BY the administration without questioning hardly any of it. To well-informed potential readers, newspapers were already dead at that point.
- Reply to this comment
- madprof44 has it exactly right. Everyone's reporting how the internet's killing newspapers but the truth is there's another major reason for their failing - - the fact that they've become a mouthpiece for one viewpoint, one party, and ridiculed and antagonized conservatives and moderate-right readers who've cancelled their subscriptions to these papers over the year. Now tell me, what business in their right mind would go lout of their way to antagonize 50% of their potential market? The liberal media, that's who. and they wonder why theye're going the way of the dinosaur? What's frightening is that many of these people will flop into the academic community, in schools, colleges, and universities which are infected by the same loony-toon, naive, pacifistic idealism.
The Count - Reply to this comment
- I watched the "Stop the Presses" story with interest but perhaps your are being premature about the complete demise of the newspaper industry. I point out that several times during sunday's broadcast you cite THE NEW YORK TIMES as the source of facts in other stories...
When the last Times rolls off the press,
What will they do at CBS?
For research and quotes and the like
You've used papers instead of your mic.
I promise not to hold a grudge,
But I hope you won't soon be sourcing Matt Drudge! - Reply to this comment
- I was very displeased with the news article about newpapers. I am not technically challenged, nor am I particularly aged. However, I find it elitist to think that everyone wants to get their news electronically. I like to get the paper and subscibe to more than one so I can hold it in my hands in any place (bus, park bench, office, etc.) and read at my leisure. I cut out articles and send them to family members of rut them away for historical reference. Not everyone has or wants a computer from which to get their news. My 94-year-old mother can't use a computer but she delights in reading a newspaper. How narrow-minded of the current generation to assume that electronics are democratic when it cannot be accessed by most people, at anytime, and in any place. I hate commenting this way rather than via snail mail, but I'm not sure those receiving this comment would know how to find snail mail or how to open an envelope!
- Reply to this comment
- My week just doesn't "begin" unless I watch CBS Sunday Morning...Appreciated the newspaper segment, but truly disagree with the focus. Yes, in larger cities, people seem to be more focused on the internet for information, rather than interracting with others or reading an impersonal newspaper. However, in small town America the computer is not the center of one's universe. We still enjoy tactile experiences such as holding that paper in our hands and reading about world and local events. An example of a thriving newspaper is the Erie Times-News, Erie Pa. I recently visited there and was thrilled to find a thick newsaper with varied articles of interest...liked it so well I wrote a letter to the editor praising their paper.
Maybe your show should extend the "shutting the presses" to researching the small town papers and see if there just might still be an appreciation for reading and holding a paper each day in preference to staring at a computer screen. - Reply to this comment
- I have been subscribing to a large daily for about 30 years. I also subscribe to a small local daily.
Where is all this local newsgathering you talk about? The majority of what I see is just cut-and-paste AP or WSJ stories. Then there's all the non-news: movie reviews, comics, recipes, survey results (this is NOT NEWS!), and light re-hashing of "all the news we can gather from the publications here in the newsroom".
Publications which are gathering real original-source news will always be in a superior position. Unfortunately, that requires reporters, editors and publishers who truly care about their craft. I fear these only exits today on "Lou Grant" re-runs. - Reply to this comment
- Technology and times change. Yes, as newsprint doomed the town crier, the internet will eventually kill off printed media. For example I am an inveterate reader. All my life I have been surrounded with books and rarely does a day go by when I do not read at least part of one book. As such, I have always had dozens, if not hundreds of books around me. Today, I have one e-book reader with over 700 books and articles on it.
Even better, all of these were downloaded from internet sources for $0.00. The print industry may moan and groan, but it's over, people. The train is leaving the station. Either get on board, or get off the platform. - Reply to this comment
- Yes, newspaper readership and advertising dollars are way down, but I think your analysis misses the point. Are people just not buying the paper because they can't afford the fifty cents? I'd suggest that the demise of the newspaper, and the major media in general is caused by the failure to report the 'who, what, when, where, why, and how'. When the media quit reporting the news and started 'trying to make a difference', when they quit printing "all the news thats fit to print" and started printing just that part of the news they want us to know, they hit the skids.
Straight up news has broad appeal, propaganda only appeals to those who agree with it. When you alienate half your readership, what would you expect? - Reply to this comment
- Oh yes. Newspapers are dead. Schadenfreude over flows. Liberals whimper and whine. Bring it on, baby.
- Reply to this comment
- The mainstream media of television, cable and newspapers--referred to as the Matrix by someone I read today...the Matrix that deceives us while sucking us dry--has brought us to this present condition where they have sown the seeds of their own destruction. And ours.
We now have a National Socialist Democratic Party, fully supported by the media.
The Treasury Secretary is calling for the power to seize any company that is deemed too important to the nation.
The bankrupt newspapers are being offered Nationalization in return for printing what the Government tells them to print.
The FCC-licensed broadcast spectrum is already under government control.
Newspapers have served their purpose. They can now be dispensed with or accept government funding and become Pravda, as if they weren't government organs already.
We are now a fascist state. The government is in control of the largest corporations.
Our newspapers failed us. - Reply to this comment
- I have many of the Charlotte Observer and NY Times historical front page headlines and photographs dating back to the fifties. What do our future generations do about this? Print them from the computer?
- Reply to this comment
- Yo...(credibility2)
Your comment about computer animation is not only irrelevant here...It is ignorant and shallow.
You sound like The "unibomber" but with no real intellect.
CG animation is a god-send to computers! But you have no ability or credibility to speak about it.
Lets see, you can go to the hospital and request no computers be used to help you.
You see...One dimensional is your outlook on the world...two dimensional would be step in the right direction...But in Three dimensions you can only better understand things.
Go to four and then your cooking with gas!
Oh yeah...whiny over-payed newspaper people.
Im glad you have competition that is free and more widespread.
Opinions...they dominated many newspapers...Comics are the only reason they are worth the 50cents you ask for.
Flash animation killed 2D...Not 3D btw. - Reply to this comment
- I'm a moderate Democrat and don't share the the views expressed here by some of the right-wing commentators. But I must say that everything CBS publishes on this subject misses half the story: the politicization of the news over the last eight years.
Dismissing the concerns of half your readership, even going out of the way to insult them, is not how the great newspapers of the past made themselves indispensable. Faced with competition from blogs or aggregators, the media seem to have made the decision to become like them rather than strengthening what they do best: hard, straight news, taking on the difficult subjects, reporting fairly.
The question, "who is going to cover city hall" would be a good one if newspapers hadn't decided over the last eight years to stop with the covering and start with the pontificating. The coverage of important events, from the war in Iraq to last year's election, has been so obviously slanted that much of your readership no longer trusts you. That fraction of the market to which you've been throwing red meat will fault you for not throwing enough. Blaming Craig's List for their predicament shows how little the media understands that much of this they brought upon themselves.
The media changed before the marketplace did. I for one am sad to see you go, but what I'll morn is what you used to be. Unfortunately, at the very moment you need the loyalty and trust of your readership you've made yourselves dispensable. - Reply to this comment
- Great, the more liberal rags that fold, the better. The MSM news is just like the newpapers. All liberal rags on TV and they too shall fall also. Real news is hard to find. Most of it is slanted towards the great messiah O and his wonderful ways. Too bad that the MSM and the liberal rags can't do a real story. With the US going farther in debt, thanks to the great stimilus bill that no one wanted to cover, or ever read, we will see more of these rags fall apart.
We won't need to cut as many trees to produce newprint to be recycled and that will be great.
Say good bye Gracie, the liberal rags are dying and I hope they all fold soon. - Reply to this comment
- I hate anything one-dimensional like news on the Internet, or computer-animated cartoons. I hate magazines going the route of the Internet. Things on the net are impersonal and lack a personality. Ironic that this is the wave of the young and the future. Says it all about both, which isn't very much.
- Reply to this comment
- It seems quite clear to me that whomever wrote this piece had read the Media Re:public report from the Berkman Center for Internet & Society, released late last year:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/mediarepublic/ - Reply to this comment
The road ahead in Afghanistan, and the crucial decision Obama faces.
